2023 (6) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng a common order. 2. Fact of the case, in a nutshell, is that Appellant is a manufacturer of Cement and Clinker having excise registration under Aurangabad Central Excise Commissionerate. While setting of Cement plants between the period 2008 and 2010, Appellant had used substantial quantity of steel items including Angles, Plates, Flats, Rounds, Square etc. as well as QST Bars, Parallel Flange Beams, TMT Rebars, Channels, Beams etc. for the purpose of fabricating capital goods and it had also procured number of capital goods, spares and components through which several capital goods such as cement mills, grinding media, silos, several conveyer systems, substation, truck loader, Wagon Tippler etc. were fabricated for the purpose of manufa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ailed the legality of the said order passed by the Commissioner, while in Appeal No. E/85159/2013, E/85160/2013 & E/88159/2013 legality of Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner for the period from July, 2010 to August, 2010, September, 2010 to March, 2011 and April, 2011 to September, 2011 periodic demand on the aforesaid items for Rs.4,84,665/-, Rs.1,78,393/- and Rs.16,44,765/- respectively are assailed by the appeal before this forum. It is required to be mentioned here that E/85078/2013, E/85159/2013 & E/85160/2013 were decided by the Commissioner through a common order passed on 24.05.2012 while the other appeal No. E/88159/2013 for the period between April, 2011 and September, 2011 was decided separately on 14.05.2013 vide his O....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he extent it is relevant for the purpose of this case and held as follows : "We do not find that amendment made in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which come into force on 7-7-2009 was clarificatory amendment as there is nothing to suggest in the Amending Act that amendment made in Explanation 2 was clarificatory in nature. Wherever the Legislature wants to clarify the provision, it clearly mentions intention in the notification itself and seeks to clarify existing provision. Even, if the new provision is added then it will be new amendment and cannot be treated to be clarification on particular thing or goods and/or input and as such, the amendment could operate only prospectively." 6. That view has been quoted with approval by the Mad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfirmed demand includes also admissible credit of Rs.1,95,91,425/- for which while agreeing with the Appellant's claim that credits in respect of all items including the items explained in Explanation 2 are admissible to the Appellant for the period from February, 2008 to 07.07.2009, non-availability of credits, as indicated in Explanation 2, to the Appellant would be effective from 07.07.2009 to June 2010, which Appellant claims to have not availed while Commissioner confirmed the entire demand including the other credits admissible to the Appellant. We consider it proper that for this limited purpose appeal could be remanded to the Original Authority. 4. We are also of the view that for the purpose of computation of the demand in Annexur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in CCE Vs. Ispat Industries Ltd., Lloyds Metals & Engg. Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, Mumbai etc. are placed permitting availment of credits on iron & steel items. Likewise Samruddhi Cement Ltd Vs CCE [2013 (297) ELT 562 (Tri.- Del.)], CCE Vs ACE Glass Container Ltd [2013-TIOL-257-HCUKHAND- CX], Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC & CE [2016 (314) ELT 372 (Tri.-Del.)] Affirmed by Chhattisgarh High Court in CC & CE Vs. Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (359) ELT 313 (Chahttisgarh)] are cited in respect of admissibility of credits on welding electrodes roads as well as Jayaswal Neco Ltd. Vs. CCE [2015-VIL-31-SC-CE],Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. CCE [2016(335) ELT 303 (Tri.-Kol.)], Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. CC & CE [2016 (339) ELT 127 (Tri.-Hyd.)], The India Ceme....